The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1887-02-04

dutiea take an oath TO support the Com
stitution Of the State. Hence, 10 obe--
diense to this oath, whenever bill Is
presentssi,the question is at ones raised
Ia tho Legislature az TO whether IL is
constitutional or not. If IL isa neces-
sary measure, aud II In the jndgmsnt
OF the Legislature II IL constitutional
they pass IL and IL bscomes law, and
their judgment Ia regard TO the consti-
tutionality 10 a final judgment, lsutject
only to tho revision Of tbe people who
mako the Conatitutions,) J and IL IL con-
elusive upon the other departments.
The common law doctrine, which fscog.
nixss as Legislative prerogative the
determination Of the constitusioDAlity
Of laws in absence Of express delegation
by tho Consti.ution of sueh legislative
power 10 the Courts, Is tFe Law Of the
land to-day, and hence the Legislature
Of the State like tbs Parliament in
Eagland 10 the rightfoI Judge as to
whether Law /. Constitutional or not.
The Courts have no appellate legislative
power under the Constitution, to revise
the judgment Of the Legislature Ia this
regard. And when they claim this
right, Il ia In defiance Of rule which
Ia regard 70 themselves they obey. II
u rnlo Of law recognized by The Conrtr,
that when q Court has Jurisdiction It's
judgment is haal and conclusive except
where appeal 10 given By law. But In
relation 70 the Legislature they disre-
gard this rule. Il Is tbs function Of
the Legislature, because il il It's duty,
TO pass upon tho consiitutionslity Of
every measure brought before il. Il
must necessarily do 10. Il therefore
has Jurisdiction of this very question
and inasmnch aa thero il no appellate
legislative powor given By the Clnsli.
tuition TO the Courts, the judgment of
the Legialstnre il fnal. AID according 10
their own rnle,is conclusive upon them.
The question ~ 70 whether law Is
constitutional or not Ia Legislative
question anil the decision Of the Legis-
lAtnre Is as binding npon the Courts as
it is upoo the Executive or upon The
people. La order 70 further show that
under our Constitution snch decision is
finai l. is but necessary to consider that
provision 10 regard to the passage Of .
Law over the vato OF The Executive.
i4st il be supposed that = bill Is passed
Which 10 the Judgment Of she Execu-
tive il plaialy aud palpsbly in violation
of the Constitution. He vetoss tie bill
and gives the reasons Why, 10 bis judge
men,, is IL unconstitutional and returns
il 10 the Legislature. Ia tbs opinion
OF two-.birds Of each house the bill il
constitutions, and il Is therefore passed
over bis veto, apd thereupon tho Con-
ssiiu,ion declares that ssis shall become
a law Has the Executive right to
disregard this Law aud treat it as q
nullity because In bis judgment IL 10
unconstitutional ? There is no warrant
for il in the Constitution. Have the
Judges a right to disregard tho law, and
treas il as nalli,y because in their
Judgment IL is unconstitutional ? There
Is no warrant fer II in the Constitution,
Bat suppose, a. Is tho frequent custom,
.his question Is brought before the
Courts. They pass upon the statute,
aud declare. a. is the increasing won't o.
the Courts, that it il contrary, in theiI
judgment, TO the Constitution and
therefore that II is no law. To thai
avent what Ii tie duty Of the Exeen-
tive ? Hero is the plain mandate of th'
Constitution declaring that statute L
lie law. His duty, under bis solemn
oath, il plain. The mandate of th'
Constitution is higher than the mandat,
of the Counts. The Constitution mus
! he obeyel and The Law must be enforced
Its operation NEST not be suspended
but by act Of the Legislative Assembly
Nor is there any warrant IA the Fedora
: Constitution for the power assumed b
the Courts to declare an enactment O
the Legislative Assembly void. Th'
second Section of Article III Of the Fed
eral Constitution, a. presented to th
Conyention which framed is,hy the com
mittee of Eve declared that .sthe judicis
power shall extend to All cases a-isip
under the laws Of the United States.
! When the motion was made to add th
words. .'the Constitution, objection ws
raised because il was thought sit va
going too far to extend the jurisdictio
Of the Courts generally to cases arisin
ander the Constitution and that it ougl
to be limited 20 cases of judiciary nj
ture." The motion was agreed to 'se'
: con, 'sit beibg generally supposed tha
the jurisdiction given was constructivel
! liwi.ed to cases of judiciary nature,
Is Elliott, 4s3.) The leading men
9 that Cons ention were COMMON law lav
yers, and when 1t was generally suppo'